logout dialog UI objections

[Allison Karlitskaya]

For a while the logout dialog that Ubuntu shipped with gnome-panel was the very nice two-dialog system that Vincent had implemented upstream. These dialogs were very attractive, HIG compliant and quite useable.

Recently, the logout dialog has regressed to one similar to what we had earlier in the release cycle. This logout dialog has too many buttons, is ugly, doesn't fit in with the style of the rest of the desktop and has some _serious_ HIG problems.

Please revert this change.

[Corey Burger (corey.burger)]

Here are the specific points abou the new dialog that I see are issues:

1. Only the cancel button actually *looks* like a button
2. No other dialog on the desktop has two rows of icons (principle of least surprise)
3. The icons don't fit within the rest of the theme

If we revert, we should also consider removing the panel icon. Paul Sladen made a good comment about why we should here:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2006-February/015891.html

It should be noted that Fedora Core 4 has the sound icon in the upper right.

[Trouilliez vincent (vincent-trouilliez-modulonet)]

+1, I agree 500% with each and every of the points raised above... please lets ditch that ugly dialog and its panel icon... any solution is better than that, including the old/Breezy dialog.
Sorry to be rude... but I still can't figure out how this dialog made it in Dapper in the first place, as just about everything about it is wrong :-(

[Martijn vdS (martijn)]

The dialog made it into dapper as part of a design that was made at UBZ (there wasn't a good/clear shutdown dialog in breezy -- we set out to design a better one)

Apparently, the GNOME upstream people decided this _at the same time_ as us, and implemented dialogs that are more HIG-compliant and overall nicer looking.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

That decision comes from Mark, feel free to discuss it but I'm not making the choices for that so I'm not going to change it

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

one task is enough

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

And please try to change the wording of your opinions a bit, I personally find it insulting, not for me, but don't forget that there are *people* who worked on this.

[Corey Burger (corey.burger)]

Vincent, your remark was not helpful. Ryan and I were trying to raise specific objections with the current dialog.

Mostly I should mention that the dialog "feels wrong". This is only partly due to its icons.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

About the icons they are not intended to stay that way and should be replaced by an another set matching the desktop theme

The applet in the panel corner is an user preference stuff, you can discuss about it for ages, some people like it, some people don't. It's easy to drop if you don't like it. Note that the icon for it should be change too

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Vincent you rant that way on every little detail since warty, (before hoary you were saying that we should keep to warty because of some details too). Maybe you should try a better argumentation path than that

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

Thanks Corey for the precise comments. One of them is that buttons don't really look like ones : here's a screenshot with relief buttons, how about it ? I'm also attaching a patch for this.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

Here's a patch (I personally don't like it, but just in case).

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Looks great Manu!

[rubinstein (rubinstein)]

I think the fundamental problem with the dialog is that there are simply too many buttons. I think that's confusing, and Ubuntu should be simple and not confusing.

Why don't we split it up in 2 dialogs like GNOME upstream?

If we want just one dialog:
It would be better to clearly visually divide the 2 rows, maybe each with a different headline so that there are two main "tasks" to choose from with sub-options.

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

SHORT STORY: Move reboot out of the way, lets emphasise user switching and energy saving options (maybe in 2 different dialogs)

LONG STORY:
Although the dialog looks really shiny, I agree it's a bit confusing.
The problem is that all these actions are somewhat related, but can't really be divided in a one-dimensional way.

(We need an option for monospace fonts in malone!)
__________________________________________________________________________
| user stops working | end login | other user | save energy | ACTION
|____________________|___________|____________|____________|______________
|________v___________|_____v_____|_____?______|____v_______| shutdown
|____________________|_____v_____|_____?______|____________| reboot
|________v___________|_____v_____|_____v______|____________| logout
|________v___________|___________|_____v______|____________| switch_user
|________v___________|___________|____________|____v_______| hibernate
|________v___________|___________|____________|____________| lock_screen
|________v___________|___________|____________|____v_______|_sleep_________

I don't know how helpful this is, but take a look.
I divided the action-caterories in "user stops working", "end login", "other user", "power down", which are all quite self-explanatory. Probably countless other combinations of logout-actions can be chosen, but what is really relevant?

Computers are often shared between people, so "other user" is useful and moreover it must be visible to make people aware of the possibilities.

Maybe it would be nice to remove switch user, and let people lock screen and choose it then. But how to make people aware of the possibility?

Huh, reboot? When does one need to reboot? After very few updates. Of course the option has been the very first in every menu since win95, but the reasons are not relevant anymore*.

Completely removing reboot would maybe be extremely gnome-ish :-D let the user just shut down and power up again! (Moreover, maybe this would have practical problems when user can't access the power button). But let agree it's seldomly needed, and let's not put it together with logout/hibernate/sleep because we are used to that.

What about the following division? People want to stop working, or pause working. How to do that is secondary:

PROPOSAL:

Pause working
 - switch user <- at the top, so people see it? Or merged with lock?
 - lock screen
 - hibernate
 - sleep

Stop working
 - logout
 - shutdown

Maybe the first time this is a surprising subdivision, but I think it is welcoming exploration and makes sense once seen.

* Maybe update-manager and reboot-icon say "you must reboot" when they actually mean you must logout to make gnome refresh, the sound-daemon restart, etcetera, like all helpdesks say when you need a dhcp lease; if so, we might want a "re-login" thing, too. Otherwise, reboot is only necessary for low-level (like kernel) updates

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

Subdivision could also be called "Pause session", and "End session", which perfectly describes the effects and would make reboot fit in the latter category.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

Posting a mockup someone just sent me by email (with his authorization).

[rubinstein (rubinstein)]

I really like the comments posted by Eric Feliksik. If we can group all the icons in manageble, meaningful divisions it is much easier to select the right button without much thinking.

[laksdjfaasdf (laksdjfaasdf)]

What is very important:

Apart from how the dialog should look - it is very important that you get the same dialog when you click on

> System > Log Out xyz or > System > Shut Down

as when you click on the applet in the right upper corner.

At the moment you have the dialog in the upper right corner and different dialogs if you click in the "System" menu.

This is the most confusing thing in my opinion!

The System menu could look like:

...
Lock screen
Logout / Shutdown

or sth. like that. And if you press "Logout / Shutdown" you get the SAME dialog like from the applet.

But please do NOT use 3 dialogs like there are now:

1. Applet dialog in the right corner
2. Lougout xyz dialog with 3 Buttons
3. Shut Down dialog with 4 Buttons

This is the most confusing thing and NOT the applet dialog.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Le mardi 28 février 2006 à 18:57 +0000, felix.rommel a écrit :

> At the moment you have the dialog in the upper right corner and
> different dialogs if you click in the "System" menu.

That is fixed since friday

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Felix, there will only be one dialog. What you are seeing is just a bit
of confusion because we are keeping up with upstream Gnome while at the
same time working on this distinctive dialog for Dapper.

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

I find the dialog confusing, but what exactly is the problem? For clarity I try to formulate 3 issues:
1) The "System/log out" thing currently offers six options (the menu we're discussing). Three of those options don't have anything to do with logging out.
2) There are six entries in total, which is a *lot*
3) The six entries have text and icons mixed, which is hard to read through. You either want to read the icons, or the text, not both. So all options horizontally aligned with text underneath would do (like win-xp does: http://www.edbott.com/weblog/images/shutdown.jpg ), or align them vertically and put the text at the right of each icon.

Now that I realize there already *are* two entries in the System-menu for related actions: "lock screen" and "log out", my previous suggestion tries to fix all these 3 problems without an extra entry in the menu, really: Lock screen is just replaced by "Pause session";

Pause session
 - lock screen
 - hibernate
 - sleep

Log out
 - log out
 - shutdown
 - restart

I omitted switch user here, see also https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2006-February/016036.html , but maybe we want it in anyway. I also assumed one extra click through the menu's for locking won't hurt.

(I don't want to brute-force my opinion through repetition, but I hope this makes my idea more clear)

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

By the way, if we have grouped the options in two funky dialogs, they would benefit from a title; see attachment.

[rubinstein (rubinstein)]

a smaller dialog proposal

[Trouilliez vincent (vincent-trouilliez-modulonet)]

I like this last mockup very much, as well as the group names ("end session" rather than "log out"), they make sense, so useability-wise they are very good in my view, as a simple user.
UI wise, just need to make buttons look like buttons, and use icons that blend with the default Gnome icon set, for consistency.

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

I actually meant to make two seperate dialogs, but the combined thing by rubinstein looks splendid indeed! I think it'd be a good improvement for the current Dapper.

[Trouilliez vincent (vincent-trouilliez-modulonet)]

> I actually meant to make two seperate dialogs

Oops, I misread your post indeed, sorry.
Indeed would be very nice to split the two halves of the dialog, and put a separate entry for each of them, at the bottom of the "System" menu. This way people could go straight at what they are after, and each dialog would be manageable, with only 3 options. Also, if we make only one dialog, we would have to do some more home work to figure out a term that would stand for both "end" session, and "pause" session. If we split the dialog, it's straighforward, the menu entries can just be called "Pause session" and "End Session", simple and efficient. So I think I would tend two prefer two clearly focused dialogs, with a direct access from the menu, rather than a single huge dialog that does everything.

[Soren Hauberg (hauberg)]

Time for a comment from the real life.
I (also) use my ubuntu as a music player. When I go to school each morning I have to turn of my machine before I put on my shoes, since I have dirty shoes that I don't want all over my apartment. That means I can't listen to music when putting on shoes. The upstream log out dialog has a timer that meant my machine would turn of 60 seconds after I opened the dialog. This meant I could open the dialog, go put on my shoes and go to school. This meant that I could listen to music while putting on my shoes.

I know this comment is a bit stupid, but the timer in the log out dialog brought music to my life in a way I hadn't imagined before, and now I really miss it. Details matter.

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Soren Hauberg wrote:
> I know this comment is a bit stupid, but the timer in the log out dialog
> brought music to my life in a way I hadn't imagined before, and now I
> really miss it. Details matter.
>
This is the best damn bug report I've seen in Dapper. I do believe the
old functionality is available if you know the right incantations.
Sebastien?

 subscribe <email address hidden>

[Rune Maagensen (rune-maagensen)]

I'd like to be able to remove the options that my machine doesn't support.

There should be a gnome-power-preferences that:

1) Specify buttons on the logout dialogue. There reboot could be ticked off by default but those that need to dualbot, use reboot regularly. Maybe a function could probe whether hibernate and/or sleep is available.
2) Allow what powerbutton does. I want my powerbutton to turn off, with the nice usplash screen.
Power button:
[ Log out dialogue ] (default)
[ Power off ] (with timer)
[ Sleep ]
[Hibernate ]
[ Log out ]
[ Custom command ] (halt rhytmbox whatever)

3) Tooltips with ALL buttons, to tell people what suspend, hibernate, log out, sleep, etc means. Eg:
"Hibernate saves your current session and powers off the computer, when you turn it on again it will be just as when you pushed hibernate (right click for more help on this subject)"

"Sleep saves your current session and put the computer in low power mode. When you hit a key or the powerbutton the session will be just as is was when you pushed the sleep button."

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

Actually it seems to go a bit far to make a preferences-dialog for the shutdown window, but on the other hand: There are such a lot of options, it might be nice.
It is, however, pretty late in the release cycle... I have, unfortunately, still never not seen the upstream gnome 2.14 dialog.

(also, see
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2006-March/000532.html
about the tooltips/help-texts, and
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2006-March/000516.html about the clutter)

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

Rune, this might be of interest to you:
with gconf-editor, /apps/gnome-power-manager/action_button_power specifies what action to take with powerbutton.
I don't really think a dialog would be very useful to configure that. The default behaviour (to show the dialog) is, however, a bit weird; It requires me to turn on my monitor and grab my mouse, in which case I can just as well click the logout option on screen.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

I've planned to set a gconf key to get upstream mode but didn't come to it yet

[Amnon Aaronsohn (bla-cs)]

I would like to comment in favor of the current dialog box. First of all it looks good. Second, even though it's not using standard buttons it's very clear what one should do -- click one of the icons. The combination of text and icons is also good -- usually the icons are enough, but if they're not (the difference between hibernate and sleep) the text helps.
Regarding the idea of having 2 dialogs: The current dialog is logical: it contains everything related to leaving the current session. When I saw it for the same time I thought it was a great improvement over the Windows two-dialog way, and I still think so. Seeing the options and choosing the right one is easier than having to think if what you want to do was classified as "pausing" or "ending" the session.
The only problem for me is the menu label "log out". The first time I used ubuntu it took me a few minutes to figure out how to shut down the computer.

[Simon Gerhards (simger-deactivatedaccount)]

The new dialog also does not allow you to save your session. See also #6687

[floid (jkanowitz)]

If this amateur UI nerd can throw into the fray...

Part of the problem is the decision to make a switch to a full dialog from a pulldown menu. Presumably this is inspired by a desire for consistency with Windows.

The irony is, within the various Gnome metaphors, what's needed is an inverse of the Windows 'Start' menu -- that is, a rapidly-accessed 'Exit' menu that details all the various ways to depart a session.

There's been some haphazard rearranging of these features in recent GUIs; first the Mac had its shutdown item buried in a menu; some subset of followon GUIs moved it to a more-easily-located dedicated widget when 'docks' and 'launchers' became popular.

Then came Windows 9x, with the Start menu, OS X with the tweak in concept for their Apple menu, and fast-user-switching on both of the big remaining personal computing platforms standardizing on the upper-right corner.

...

What I see is the germ of a pretty damn good idea here; the 'exit' icon, while initially unfamiliar (as hieroglyphs always are), is an appropriate categorization for all these 'You are about to invoke a dramatic switch in mode' options. Why have FUS in one widget and logout and shutdown buried elsewhere, when they're all related to session management and the user may still be decision-making while invoking the menu or dialog? Also, for whatever weird confluence of reasons, the positional consistency for 'close button' has moved from upper left to upper right in the past decade, so there's some familiarity for the average MS migrant there.

That's the good part. The bad part is making it a full blocking dialog when it doesn't deserve to be. A dropdown combining the FUS list with shutdown and logout options is much more easily dismissed (by 'clicking off' to change focus) when invoked accidentally, no 'Cancel' or 'exit' item needed, and no consideration of focus required. Only destructive selections (a full logout or shutdown) then deserve a blocking confirmation dialog when selected to prove the user's really sure.

This probably amounts to wishlisting a *third* rewrite of the whole functionality; I haven't seen Gnome's official approach yet, and bumped into Ubuntu's current direction in the past day or two. I can also appreciate that the existing approach is probably guaranteed to survive across GNOME/KDE/XFCE distributions, while a panel applet that does more of the heavy lifting itself rather than invoking another X client might not, but such is life.

(Off-topic, but when it comes to panel layout and use of screen corners, I like to put the window list applet in the top left. This bumps the Applications menu out of that spot, but serves my need for OS/2 Warpcenter nostalgia and is a bit more convenient than strafing desktops or sliding along the Windows-style switcher. The changing icon also provides a cute and consistently-placed reminder of what has focus without having to visually interpret a messy desktop. Since 'preferred' applications wind up with their own launcher icons anyway, far from screen corners, anyone higher-up want to try this for a while and decide if it's worth considering as a basic UI feature?)

[Andrea Garbarini (garba)]

I am sorry if what I'll be saying might sound blunt, but I find the new logout dialog totally useless and very, very inconsistent. Not only is its layout not in keep with gnome's HIG, but what I find disturbing is that it lacks consistence:

- why not provide all the options straight in the gnome's system menu? right now, in the system menu we have "lock screen" and "logout", I wonder what makes the "lock screen" action so special to have a right to sit there while, for example, "logout", "change user" "reboot" etc. haven't this right
- most of all, why should the "logout" button in gnome's system menu bring up this dialog rather than doing what it should be supposed to do i.e. logout the user?
- last day my father was using my pc to browse the web, think of him as your average non-tech savvy person in his sixties... I told him to "shutdown the pc when done"... Well, what he did was looking for some option in the "system" menu, and this is good, but he then called for help 'cause he couldn't find any "shutdown" option... and remember most users, accustomed to "some OS" out there which lack multi user support, don't even know what "logging out" is all about, hence they would never click on "logout" in the first place.

So please, why not make things easier for both the end users and you, the developers: I would reccomend you got rid of that logout thing and provide all the options straight in the "system" menu, forgive me for not appreciating the effort some of you guys put on that logout dialog but I think the outcome, well, is simply subpar with the level of excellence dapper is reaching... as a side note, the "cancel" button gets slightly resized when, hovering over the buttons with the mouse pointer, the text describing the highlighted option spans over two lines... not good at all... sorry but i am very picky when it comes to gtk finesse =)

regards, andre

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

This last comment is more about wording/small bugs than the dialog itself. The system menu's entry will be renamed (we're just searching for the right word to use, currently we're thinking of "Exit...").

The lock screen entry will probably be removed, since it is available in the logout dialog.

Making all options available directly in the menu (logout, switch, sleep, etc.): I don't think it's a good solution, since the menu would get *really* long.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

And about the last thing (Cancel button and help labels), the problem is solved, the patch will be uploaded very soon.

[Pavel Rojtberg (rojtberg)]

I thought about this thing while reading Andreas Post in the Forums. I have no real preference for any of the dialogs, but I want to share my thoughts.

I think there are basically two motivations, which can drive the user to end his session:
1. he wants to change the state of the PC (reboot, shutdown, hibernate etc.)
2. he wants to change the state of the session (lock screen, logout, change user)

this two topics are not really connected to each other and therefore you can set a default for each, which will be chose after a timeout.
I'd choose shutdown and lock screen - I think this is the best choice for the user if he "forgets" what he initially wanted to do.

You are alreadyrespecting this by putting the according buttons in two seperate lines - so why not make two seperate dilogs out of it and gaining the default preset wished by Soren Hauberg.

[Eduardo Cereto (dudus)]

the new icon set rolled today makes the dialog look ugly as the small verssion of the log out icon show up instead of the larger. It's obviously wrong.

I don't dislike the dialog at all, and I think it could be the final version. No need for big changes

[Mårten Woxberg (maxmc)]

You are aware of the fact that the Cancel button in the current version changes size depending on what you mouseover?
(this last checked in dapper from 2006-04-18)

About the UI in general, I seldom logout or switch user on my machine since I'm a single user, I do reboot quite often since i dual-boot (No Oblivion in Dapper sadly), and I do use Shutdown.
Now Hibernate and Sleep don't work at all on my AMD64 Machine so I don't realy understand why I have the option.

So I only need three options, Logout, Reboot, Shutdown.

And about the menu item name:
Exit... well that works in English but AFAIK You don't exit programs you close or quit? It could become a translation issue...
I'm not sure I can follow the thought of wanting to hibernate the computer and choosing Exit... either.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

the cancel button issue is known as bug #40027

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

1) Manu, can you make Esc trigger the cancel function of the dialog? Especially since the dialog-launcher uses so much screen-estate (the corner of the screen; whether that's appropriate is a different discussion), it's nice to get rid of it quickly.
2) I really like the logout icon, it's far nicer than the old gnome-one. Great work.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

esc for cancel is bug #39982 and is fixed by a patch update blocked by the betaCD freeze at the moment

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

My latest patch solves these problems (cancel button and Esc button), but as Sebastien said it has not yet been uploaded.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

About the new icons, I have two requests (and I am attaching a screenshot and a mockup for them) :

1) In sleep and hibernate icons, there is a small problem in the center (some kind of white rectangular shape), see on the screenshot, I have magnified the two zones.

2) The fact that nearly all icons have distinguishable colors is great, I think. However, restart and hibernate have the same color (blue). I would suggest keeping blue for hibernate (blueish ice...) and make the restart icons purple like it was before (see mockup), or another distinguishable color.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

See the magnified zones

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

Here's a suggestion for restart color (purple). We could choose another one, I just think it should be different from the others.

[Eric Feliksik (milouny)]

I don't know what your plans with switch-user and lock are, but those two icons are images now while the others are abstract symbols. This already was so previously, only now the logout icon is a symbol, too. Maybe this arrowmania could be amplified with the following new icons:

* lock-screen: a circle with a cross through it
* switch user: a circle with one arrow pointing inwards and another making a circular movement inside the circle

That way we'd be more consistent AND cryptic at the same time! ;-)

Ok, I'm kidding, actually I think it would make more sense to keep the door-exit symbol for logout, and maybe it'd be possible to make a frozen computer symbol for hibernate (frozen is a good idea, but no-one will get your blue-icon-reference).
For the sleep-icon I'm thinking of the image of a totally exhausted hacker that fell asleep on his keyboard, but that's probably one of my less brilliant ideas.

[Tony Yarusso (tonyyarusso)]

Now, I will first agree that there should be some work on making icons match other things, and having them be themable would be great, but it sounds like a lot of people are on that already. The main thing that irked me about the dialogue was the sheer size. I mean, it takes up what, 25% of the total screen area? I find that a bit excessive, and not what I would expect from a simple dialogue window. If some of the space between icons were removed, space around the border shrunk down, and maybe the icons themselves made just a tad smaller if necessary. Basically, my impression when the window popped up was that it was huge. So, just some trimming would be great in my opinion.

[Jonathon Conte (thesicktwist)]

We find ourselves with a difficult decision to make. Two solutions exist for one problem and unfortunately one must be discarded. However, we should not allow this fact to prevent us from pragmatically surveying the options and selecting the one which best fits the project. It is with that in mind that I offer the following observations and by no means do I intend to offend or discourage any developers involved.

The GNOME upstream solution provides an organized, HIG compliant way for the user to select between the various ways to end a session. It does so by balancing choice with simplicity and manages to group those choices in a meaningful way that does not require excessive mouse clicking from the user. The Log Out and Shut Down dialogs in this solution have the additional feature that they will automatically react if left alone for 60 seconds. This feature benefits the user by requiring one less mouse click should he or she wish to log out or halt the computer.

In contrast, the Ubuntu solution presents the user with the same five options from the upstream solution plus two additional choices (sleep and hibernate) in one cluttered window. Switch User and Restart both require the same number of clicks as the upstream solution. Lock Screen requires one extra click (if it is to be removed from the System menu as was mentioned previously in this bug report). Shut Down and Log Out also require one extra click than the GNOME solution if we take into account the automatic reaction feature that the upstream solution provides. The two rows of atypically large buttons break consistency with other dialog windows in GNOME. Furthermore, seven functions plus a cancel button is an overwhelming number of choices to present to a user.

Ending a session is one of the key areas where Ubuntu's usability will impact its users since most will perform this task frequently. For the reasons outlined above, I feel that the upstream session dialogs will provide the most polished experience for users and I urge Ubuntu devs to at least reconsider their adoption.

[Trouilliez vincent (vincent-trouilliez-modulonet)]

> The GNOME upstream solution provides an organized, HIG compliant
> way for the user to select between the various ways to end a session.

> For the reasons outlined above, I feel that the upstream session dialogs will
> provide the most polished experience for users and I urge Ubuntu devs to at
> least reconsider their adoption.

+1.... +2, +10,000 ... where do I sign ?

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Tony, themable icons is bug #40314

People who want to use the upstream dialogs are free to do so, you just have to change /apps/panel/global/upstream_session key to true with gconf-editor (as documented by the package changelog)

Jonathon, upstream dialogs have no sleep nor hibernate option, isn't that an issue to you?

Vincent, we appreciate your enthousiasm but you already did such comments and made your opinion clear on the topic, no need to send one again

[Trouilliez vincent (vincent-trouilliez-modulonet)]

> People who want to use the upstream dialogs are free to do so,
> you just have to change /apps/panel/global/upstream_session
> key to true with gconf-editor

Wow, thanks !!! I didn't know it was so easy to do, just did it and indeed works like a charm ! :o)

> Vincent, we appreciate your enthousiasm but you already did such
> comments and made your opinion clear on the topic, no need to
> send one again I apologize about my comments about the new dialog...

I would never had opened my mouth had I known about that magic Gconf key. Now that I know about it, I promise you will not hear from me anymore ;-)

[x (xk2c-deactivatedaccount)]

I also have problems with the logout window.

I have tried that:
> People who want to use the upstream dialogs are free to do so,
> you just have to change /apps/panel/global/upstream_session
> key to true with gconf-editor

But this works only when clicking on the logout button.
I use a shotcut to logout.

The second and more confusing thing to me is the little "save the session" box disappeared on logout window.

I get used to set up my session as i liked it, then loged out and saved it.
How do i do that now?

Here is a quote from the online Help window for "Setting Session Preferences":

Automatically save changes to session:
[...]
If you do not select this option, when you
end your session the Logout Confirmation dialog displays a Save current setup option.

So that "Save current setup option" is missing.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Thilo, the save session issue is known and happens with upstream dialog as well as with the Ubuntu one

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

note than you can run gnome-session-save to store the current session

[x (xk2c-deactivatedaccount)]

>note than you can run gnome-session-save to store the current session

:D

You made my day. thanks

[Allison Karlitskaya (desrt)]

Is there any chance of getting the default behaviour changed to match upstream? The upstream solution is very clearly _more sane_ (even if it doesn't have all of the functionality/flash of the Ubuntu one).

Some things to keep in mind:

- Lock is already on the menu
- Suspend/hibernate don't even work for (probably more than) half the people who use Ubuntu
- Following upstream goes with the principle of least suprise (and follows the HIG to boot)
- This is Dapper - we should try to not be suprising

Essentially, I am asking for sane defaults here.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

from where do you get the suspend,hibernate stat (I'm not taking the decision for that dialog and just curious on that)? Note that lock being to the menu can be "fixed" quickly (a menu item is easy to drop) if that's what bothers you (but I don't think that's the point)

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Just to be clear what the final state should be, the System menu should
only have the Quit (power on/off) menu item, which is the same as what
is on the panel. So whether you go through the System menu or the panel
you get the same dialog and choices. Ryan, this is final for Dapper.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

This is the same icon as the current one, but I cleaned it from its whiteish problem in the middle.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

Same problem with suspend icon, here's a cleaned up version.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

This is a suggestion for making the reboot icon purple.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

In the three icons above, the best way would still be to fix the SVG directly. If somebody makes them available, I can do that.

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

Mark, what do you think about those? Shall I send Dave a copy and hear his opinion or shall I include Manu's icons in the next ubuntu-artwork update?

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Mark, what do you think about those? Shall I send Dave a copy and hear
> his opinion or shall I include Manu's icons in the next ubuntu-artwork
> update?
>
We are still waiting for the SVG versions. Yes, I think it's worth
asking Dave to comment on those, and if he likes them, asking Manu to
take responsibility for that set of icons as long as he stays true to
the core glassiness of the design we currently have.

So far weve tried to keep the line of communication as simple as
possible for Dave, because he needs clear direction not to be involved
in a debate. Manu is doing great work, and in this case, I would have no
problem to have manu take responsibility for this set, these icons are
improved but still true to the core vision that Dave has set.

Mark

[Samuel Cormier-Iijima (sciyoshi)]

Sorta off topic, but has anybody noticed how when you select log out the background colors become dithered and look a little strange? It seems like it should just change the brightness (i.e. dim the background, not saturate it...)

Sorry if this has been posted elsewhere, I couldn't find anything about this.

Samuel

[Allison Karlitskaya (desrt)]

The problem you mention is addressed in bug 39371.

[Andrea Garbarini (garba)]

As I can see this debate on the logout GUI keeps going on, all I can say is that when i told my dad to "shut down the pc" he couldn't find any reseanoble item in the system menu which seemed to perform this task, that "logout" thing made no sense to him at all. I can't see why you're putting all this effort into this thing when gnome comes with a sane upstream version. It's beyond me.

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

The icon that was intended to be there for MONTHS now, has never been
put there. That is a little frustrating, but until the correct icon is
in place we can't tell. I understand your concern, but I think you'll
see when the correct icon is in place that this becomes rather obvious.

[Soren Hauberg (hauberg)]

fre, 12 05 2006 kl. 17:29 +0000, skrev Mark Shuttleworth:
> I understand your concern, but I think you'll
> see when the correct icon is in place that this becomes rather obvious.
You shouldn't really depend too much on icons. Some people disable them,
some people can't see them (bad sight), and some people just don't
understand them, because icons are interpreted different in different
societies.

[x (xk2c-deactivatedaccount)]

> I use a shortcut to logout.

This got lost in one of the latest updates.
A shortcut for the logout screen is no more available right now.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Thilo, please don't abuse that bug to describe totally different issues, that one has nothing to do with the bug you are commenting on

[x (xk2c-deactivatedaccount)]

Doh of course. Exuse me please.

I will search the open bug list and if it´s not allready there open a new one.

[Allison Karlitskaya (desrt)]

I should point out bug 45173 here since it definitely falls into the category of "logout dialog UI objection".

[Matthew Lange (matthewlange)]

I agree. the new interface is clunky, and extremely large. When I first saw it, I had to take a step back to see the whole thing as a dialog instead of as a window. I think it needs to be smaller and more sleek.

[Justin J Stark (justinjstark)]

After having read through this bug's comments, here are my two cents.

1) The "lock screen" item should not be treated differently than suspend/hibernate. They are all options that are a) potentially timer-controlled and automatic and b) have no bearing on the current gnome session other than to pause it.
2) Why not, rather than using a dialog, just incorporate a submenu into the System menu to handle the different shutdown/logout options? It would be simpler and easier to navigate. Plus it would be consistent with preferences and administration menus that do not use dialogs. (See proposal below)
3) Separating the dialog (or menus) into "Pause Session" (or some other intuitive name) and "End Session" (or Shut Down etc) would be great. I have no idea why things like sleep and shutdown are in the same dialog as their functionality is of a very different nature.

Here is my proposal for a menu-based version of the dialog:

System
**Session (User)
****Lock Screen
****Switch User
****Log Out
**Pause (Power Saving)
****Sleep
****Hibernate
**Quit (Shut Down)
****Reboot
****Power Off

Note: Lock Screen could also go in the Pause submenu, however, locking the screen is sort of a semi-logout which requires a password so I placed it in Session/User.

[Trouilliez vincent (vincent-trouilliez-modulonet)]

Sounds a bit like the gnome approache, except it replaces the small dialogs with submenus. I quite like the idea.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

Closing this bug, since Dapper is now frozen and the logout dialog design won't change before release. Feel free to open specific bugs for issues that haven't been reported yet. We'll talk about this again for edgy :)

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

The 'white spaces' are gone too.